PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BMAR vs. BNO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BMAR vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (BMAR) and United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BMAR achieves a 8.62% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 90.47% return.


BMAR

1D
-0.26%
1M
2.82%
YTD
8.62%
6M
9.58%
1Y
20.97%
3Y*
16.97%
5Y*
12.18%
10Y*

BNO

1D
1.99%
1M
-10.29%
YTD
90.47%
6M
86.00%
1Y
91.89%
3Y*
27.93%
5Y*
24.16%
10Y*
13.60%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BMAR vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
BMAR
Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March
8.62%14.97%16.49%23.09%-7.06%16.79%10.88%
BNO
United States Brent Oil Fund LP
90.47%-5.44%9.67%-3.43%35.25%62.34%-24.32%

Correlation

The correlation between BMAR and BNO is -0.31, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.31

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.06

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.06

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2020

0.12

The correlation between BMAR and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.31 (1 year) to 0.12 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

BMAR vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BMAR
BMAR Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
BMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
BMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
BMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
BMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank

BNO
BNO Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
BNO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
BNO Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BMAR vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (BMAR) and United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


BMARBNODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.62

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.41

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.58

1.38

+0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.73

5.17

-1.44

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

20.88

9.76

+11.12

BMAR vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BMAR Sharpe Ratio is 2.85, which is comparable to the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BMAR and BNO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BMARBNODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.85

2.23

+0.62

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.08

0.69

+0.40

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.37

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.96

0.14

+0.82

Drawdowns

BMAR vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BMAR drawdown since its inception was -21.43%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BMAR and BNO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BMARBNODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.43%

-87.06%

+65.63%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.64%

-17.87%

+12.23%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.86%

-23.75%

+10.89%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-15.02%

-33.70%

+18.68%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-75.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.26%

-10.29%

+10.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.34%

-40.17%

+37.83%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.01%

9.45%

-8.44%

Volatility

BMAR vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (BMAR) is 1.45%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.22%. This indicates that BMAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BNO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BMARBNODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.45%

14.22%

-12.77%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.88%

36.10%

-30.22%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.39%

41.46%

-34.07%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.32%

35.38%

-24.06%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.67%

36.68%

-23.01%

BMAR vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

BMAR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.


Dividends

BMAR vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

Neither BMAR nor BNO has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


BMAR and BNO have a correlation of -0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BNO has higher volatility (14.22%) compared to BMAR (1.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BMAR dropped -21.43% vs BNO's -87.06%.

On 5-year performance, BNO leads with 24.16% vs 12.18% for BMAR. On fees, BMAR is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, BMAR has been the lower-risk option at 1.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, BNO has performed better with a 24.16% return vs 12.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BMAR is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.

BMAR and BNO have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

BMAR is categorized as Defined Outcome, while BNO is Oil & Gas. BMAR tracks S&P 500 Price Return Index, while BNO tracks Front Month Brent Crude Oil. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for BMAR and 0.90% for BNO.

BMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.85 vs 2.23), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BMAR and BNO

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer